3 ms·

There really is no privacy is there?

by gumballindie 3y ago

ronsor 3y ago
Aren't legal proceedings generally public information?
- gumballindie 3y ago
  Then why this: “potentially sensitive nature of this material”.
  - ww520 3y ago
    It's a red herring, unless they're saying it's sensitive or unethical to potentially put law professionals out of work.
  - Bjartr 3y ago
    Information can be both public and potentially sensitive
    - onethought 3y ago
      Sure, but then it's irrelevant to this... because it's already public, this isn't changing that status.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
ww520 3y ago
All court records, filings, judgements, laws, and reviews are public records unless sealed by the courts. It's a matter of whether they have been digitalized or not.
- pradn 3y ago
  How easy it is to access data is a dimension of privacy, too. When Facebook introduced the Timeline, it made it easy to jump to a year in the past. Before, you had to laboriously scroll back through all recent posts. Making my old embarrassing high school photos easy to look up affects me! It’s one thing for someone to have to dig up records through obscure legal websites. It’s another for it to show up on the front page of your Google search listing.
mathisfun123 3y ago
In the US you have the 4th amendment which proscribes unreasonable search and seizure but that is not a right to privacy. Thus, there is no such right articulated in the amendments themselves. Therefore, it's decided by case law (which is how all such things are decided in common law systems of jurisprudence). Chief amongst such cases is Griswold v. Connecticut, where the ruling found such a right is established by the constitution through a "reading between the lines" (penumbral reasoning). Okay this isn't conlaw 101 but my point is privacy and right to privacy are technical terms, possibly unintuitive to you. Now someone's rights may have been arrogate here - I don't know - but that would be again argued in a court of law.
- flangola7 3y ago
  This is a very narrow and America-centric viewpoint. Privacy is a codified constitutional human right in many nations, including details and edge cases addressed by legislation and/or case law.
  - mathisfun123 3y ago
    I am very confused by your response - how are we in disagreement in the least?

There really is no privacy is there?

ronsor 3y ago

Aren't legal proceedings generally public information?

gumballindie 3y ago
Then why this: “potentially sensitive nature of this material”.
- ww520 3y ago
  It's a red herring, unless they're saying it's sensitive or unethical to potentially put law professionals out of work.
- Bjartr 3y ago
  Information can be both public and potentially sensitive
  - onethought 3y ago
    Sure, but then it's irrelevant to this... because it's already public, this isn't changing that status.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

ww520 3y ago

All court records, filings, judgements, laws, and reviews are public records unless sealed by the courts. It's a matter of whether they have been digitalized or not.

pradn 3y ago
How easy it is to access data is a dimension of privacy, too. When Facebook introduced the Timeline, it made it easy to jump to a year in the past. Before, you had to laboriously scroll back through all recent posts. Making my old embarrassing high school photos easy to look up affects me! It’s one thing for someone to have to dig up records through obscure legal websites. It’s another for it to show up on the front page of your Google search listing.

mathisfun123 3y ago

In the US you have the 4th amendment which proscribes unreasonable search and seizure but that is not a right to privacy. Thus, there is no such right articulated in the amendments themselves. Therefore, it's decided by case law (which is how all such things are decided in common law systems of jurisprudence). Chief amongst such cases is Griswold v. Connecticut, where the ruling found such a right is established by the constitution through a "reading between the lines" (penumbral reasoning). Okay this isn't conlaw 101 but my point is privacy and right to privacy are technical terms, possibly unintuitive to you. Now someone's rights may have been arrogate here - I don't know - but that would be again argued in a court of law.

flangola7 3y ago
This is a very narrow and America-centric viewpoint. Privacy is a codified constitutional human right in many nations, including details and edge cases addressed by legislation and/or case law.
- mathisfun123 3y ago
  I am very confused by your response - how are we in disagreement in the least?